Post on 02-Jun-2018
transcript
8/10/2019 Thsen Mortar Ucl
1/397
PROPERTIES OF MORTAR
FOR SELF-COMPACTING CONCRETE
A thesis submitted to the University of London
for the degreeof
Doctorof
Philosophy
by
Jinhua An
Department of Civil and Environmental EngineeringUniversity College London
University of London
January 2002
ta ,ZI,ML
IC
*
8/10/2019 Thsen Mortar Ucl
2/397
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I would like to thank my supervisor Dr P. Domone for his invaluable advice and
guidance through this research in particular his patience in revising the thesis.
Thanks should also be given Mr 0. Bourne without his support n the laboratory the
quantity of experiments carried out would not have been possible.
I would also like to express my gratitude o Hsi-Wen Chai and E. M. Ahmed for
providing useful information and sharing their thoughts and their friendship and help
especiallyn the initial
period of this project.
Finally my thanks go to the Graduate school of University College London and to the
Overseas Research Student award scheme for funding the work presented n this
thesis.
8/10/2019 Thsen Mortar Ucl
3/397
Abstract 3
Abstract
The effect of types and amount of powder materials, admixtures, sand and water
content on the properties of self-compacting concrete (SCQ have been investigatedby tests on the mortar fraction. Tests on concrete have also been a carried out to
confirm the most important effects.
The component materials used were
e eight types of powder- PC and SRC, GGBS, PFA, CSF and three types of LSP,
o six superplasticizers -a naphthelene Conplast430) and melarnine type, two co-
polymers, one polycarboxylic ether (Glenium5 1) and one formulated for SCC,
* two viscosity agents Welan gum and a cellulose product ,9 one fine and coarse aggregate, generally at volumetric proportions of 40-47.5 of
the mortar and 31.7 of the concrete espectively.
Testing has concentrated on workability and workability retention of mixes with a
single powder,binary
and ternary powder combinations, with and without a viscosityagent. Tests have included spread/slump low, Wunnel flow time, and two-point
workability tests for mortar and concrete, a U-box test for concrete, and some
strength ests on concrete.
The most important outcomes nclude:
o Glenium 51, the most efficient superplasticizer, was selected for most of the
programme, added at 1 minute after the start of mixing.
* Excellent workability and workability retention was obtained in binary and
ternary mixes containing CSF, and n SRC single powder mixes.
9 Yield stress and plastic viscosity are two distinct and ndependent properties.
e Welan gum has better compatibility with Conplast430 than Glenium5l; its use
improved workability retention but slightly decreased trength.
9 There are strong elationships etween* the properties f concrete nd ts mortar component,
0 the rheological constants and single point test results for mortar and concrete.
e The rheology of some mortar mixes may be better described by the Herschel-
Bulkley model than by the Bingham model.
8/10/2019 Thsen Mortar Ucl
4/397
8/10/2019 Thsen Mortar Ucl
5/397
Contents
2 5 2 Comment 117
2 6 Hardened properties and durability 117
2 7 Mixing procedures 118
2 7 1 Mixing methods or the superplasticizer 119
2 7 2 Optimization of the use of Welan Gum during mixing121
2 7 3 Comments 121
2 8 Conclusions 121
CHAPTER 3 AIMS AND SCOPE OF RESEARCH 124
3 1 Aims and scope of research 124
3 2 Why mortar tests? 126
3 3 Scope of test programme 127
CHAPTER 4 MATERIALS AND TEST METHODS 131
4 1 Materials 131
4 1 1 Cements 131
4 1 2 Other powder types 132
4 1 3 Admixtures 135
4 1 4 Water 136
4 1 5 Aggregate 136
4 2 Test methods 137
4 2 1 Tests on mortar 137
4 2 2 Tests on concrete 138
4 2 3 Development of helical impeller rheometer or mortar and the calibration 144
4 3 Mixing and testing procedures 156
4 3 1 Mortar 156
4 3 2 Concrete 157
4 4 Repeatability and reproducibility of mixing and test methods 157
4 4 1 Mortar 158
4 4 2 Concrete 159
4 5 Conclusions 165
CHAPTER 5 MIXING PROCEDURE AND SELECTION OF
SUPERPLASTICIZER 166
5 1 Optimisation of superplasticizer addition time 167
5 1 1 Effect of addition time on saturation dosage or Conplast430 167
5 1 2 Determination of SSD for each ype of superplasticizer with 2 minutes delayed addition
method 170
5 1 3 Optimisation of addition time for each ype of superplasticizer 172
8/10/2019 Thsen Mortar Ucl
6/397
Contents
5 2 Selection of superplasticizer
5 3 Test on concrete
5 4 Conclusion
175
177
180
CHAPTER 6 FRESH PROPERTIES OF MIXES WITH A SINGLE TYPE OFPOWDER 181
6 1 Effect of water/cement ratio 182
6 1 1 Tests on mortar 182
6 1 2 Tests on concrete 189
6 2 Effect of sand volume ratio 194
6 2 1 Tests on mortar 194
6 2 2 Tests on concrete 197
6 3 Effect of types of cement 201
6 3 1 Tests on mortar 201
6 3 2 Tests on concrete 203
6 4 Conclusions 206
CHAPTER 7 FRESH PROPERTIES OF MIXES WITH BINARY BLENDS OF
POWDER 207
7 1 Tests on mortar 208
7 1 1 Binary blends at a single replacement evel 208
7 1 2 Effect of the particle size of limestone powder 214
7 1 3 Effect of amount of CSF and imestone powder 217
7 1 4 Discussion 221
7 2 Tests on concrete 225
7 3 Conclusion 230
CHAPTER 8 FRESH PROPERTIES OF MIXES WITH TERNARY BLENDS
OF POWDER 232
8 1 Mortar tests 233
8 1 1 Types of CSF ternary mixes 233
8 1 2 Effect of CSF content 238
8 2 Concrete tests 240
8 3 Conclusion 244
CHAPTER 9 PROPERTIES OF MIXES CONTAINING VISCOSITY GENTS
2459 1 Preliminary study 246
9 1 1 Properties of Welan gum solutions 247
8/10/2019 Thsen Mortar Ucl
7/397
Contents
9.1.2 Effect of mixing procedure on the efficiency of Welan gum 248
9.1.3 Welan gum and superplasticizer ompatibility 250
9.1.4 Effect of Welan gum on SSD and maximum workability 251
9.2 Welan gum superplasticizer compatibility 252
9.2.1 Mortar 253
9.2.2 Concrete 261
9.3 Effect of Welan gum on the properties of the mixes with a single type of powder 262
9.3.1 Mortar 262
9.3.2 Concrete 268
9.4 Effect of Welan gum on the properties of the mixes with binary blends of powder 272
9.4.1 Mortar 272
9.4.2 Concrete 276
9.5 Conclusions 280
CHAPTER 10 FURTHER ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION OF THE TEST
RESULTS 282
10.1 Rheology of mortar 282
10.1.1 Shear hickening 283
10.1.2 Shear hinning 286
10.2 Relationships between he fresh properties for mortar and concrete 290
10.2.1 Relationships between mortar properties 290
10.2.2 Relationships between concrete properties 306
10.2.3 Relationships between he fresh properties of concrete and ts mortar component 314
10.3 Relationship between concrete strength and powder composition-a discussion of
Feret s rule 325
10.4 Conclusion 328
CHAPTER 11 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTUREWOR K 330
11.1 Conclusions 330
11.2 Recommendations or future work 334
REFERENCES 336
APPENDIX I MIX DESIGN METHODS 350APPENDIX 2A TYPICAL OUTPUT OF THE PROGRAMME OF TWO-POINT TEST FOR
CONCRETE 359
APPENDIX 3 RESULTS FOR TESTS ON EFFECT OF CUP SIZE 360
APPENDIX 4 TWO EXAMPLES OF THE PROGRAMME FOR CALIBRATION TO OBTAIN K
VALUE. 362
8/10/2019 Thsen Mortar Ucl
8/397
Contents
APPENDIX 5 RESULTS FOR TESTS ON EFFECT OF CUP SIZE FURTHER STUDY 365
APPENDIX 6 REPEATABILITY AND REPRODUCIBILITY OF THE TEST RESULTS FOR
MORTAR AND CONCRETE 367
APPENDIX 7 RESULTS FOR TESTS ON MIXING PROCEDURE AND SELECTION OF
SUPERPLASTICIZER 369
APPENDIX 8 TEST RESULTS FOR FRESH PROPERTIES OF THE MIXES WITH A SINGLE
TYPES OF POWDER 373
APPENDIX 9 TEST RESULTS FOR FRESH PROPERTIES OF MIXES WITH BINARY BLENDS
OF POWDER 379
APPENDIX 10 TEST RESULTS FOR PROPERTIES OF CSF TERNARY BLENDS OF POWDER
MIXES 385
APPENDIX II RESULTS OF PRELIMINARY STUDY ON WELAN GUM SOLUTIONS AND
MORTAR CONTAINING WELAN GUM 388
APPENDIX 12 TEST RESULTS FOR WELAN GUM AND SUPERPLASTICIZER
COMPATIBILITY 390
APPENDIX 13 TEST RESULTS OF THE EFFECT OF WELAN GUM ON THE PROPERTIES OF
THE MIXES WITH SINGLE TYPE OF POWDER 392
APPENDIX 14 TEST RESULTS FOR RHEOLOGICAL MODELS FOR MORTAR 397
8/10/2019 Thsen Mortar Ucl
9/397
8/10/2019 Thsen Mortar Ucl
10/397
List of figures 10
Figure 2-26 Effect of Welan gum dosage on mortar properties 71
Figure 2-27 Effect of Welan gum on rheology of concrete mixes (wlc=0.55) 72
Figure 2-28 Effect of Welan gum on rheology of concrete mixes (w/c=0.5) 72
Figure 2-29 Comparison of concrete properties with different types and fineness modulus of sand a)
V-funnel flowtime
(b) Box filling height (c) Segregation 75
Figure 2-30 Effect of fineness modulus of sand on the fresh properties of concrete 77
Figure 2-31 Effect of fineness modulus of sand on the U-box filling height 78
Figure 2-32 Effect of sand content on the maximum filling height by U-box test 79
Figure 2-33 Effect of sand/mortar atio on required (a) water/powder atio (b) sp dosage or a mortar
to achieve a controlled fresh properties 80
Figure 2-34 The effect of sand content on the required spread of mortar to achieve a specific fresh
property of concrete 81
Figure 2-35 Effect of types of coarse aggregate n the passing ability of mixes with (a) w/c=0.35 (b)w/c=0.5 82
Figure 2-36 Maximum gaps or stable arching o occur with a I-D and 2-D mesh 83
Figure 2-37 passing ability of SCC through bars with (a) 1-D mesh, b) 2-D mesh 83
Figure 2-38 Effect of fineness modulus of coarse aggregate n (a) slump flow (b) V-funnel flow time
of concrete 85
Figure 2-39 Relationship between concrete slump flow and coarse aggregate content for the same
mortar flow 86
Figure 2-40 Effect of coarse aggregate ontent on slump flow and V-funnel flow time of concrete 87Figure 2-41 Effect of coarse aggregate ontent on the maximum filling height by U-box test 87
Figure 2-42 Effect of temperature nd ypes and dosage of superplasticizer on slump flow loss 88
Figure 2-43 Effect of superplasticizer on workability retention in terms of (a) yield stress b) plastic
viscosity 89
Figure 2-44 workability retention of mortar 90
Figure 2-45 Effect of Welan gum and sika 10 on workability retention 91
Figure 2-46 workability retention of Welan gum mixes (a) 100 PC (b) LSP binary powder (c)
GGBS binary powder (d) PFA binary powder (e) LSP/GGBS/PFA ernary mixes 92
Figure 2-47 Effect of silica fume on workability retention in terms of (a) yield stress (b) plastic
viscosity 93
Figure 2-48 Effect of types of sand on workability retention of SCC (a) river sand (b) crushed sand
(c) sea sand 94
Figure 2-49 Relationships of fresh properties between concrete and mortar (a) SF - D., (b) SF-T,,, c)
Tv (concrete)-Tv mortar), (d) Tv- g 99
Figure 2-50 Relationships between resh properties of concrete and mortar for (a) flow area (b) V-
funnel flow time 100
Figure 2-51 Relationships between fresh properties of concrete and mortar (a) SF - D., (b)
Tv(concrete)-Tv (mortar) 101
Figure 2-52 A comparison of the relationships between properties of concrete and mortar obtained by
Yahia, Nagomoto and Chai 103
8/10/2019 Thsen Mortar Ucl
11/397
List of figures 11
Figure2-53 Relationship between spread low of concrete and yield stress of mortar component 104
Figure 2-54 Comparison of three different equations or plastic viscosity of mortar 109
Figure 2-55 Relationships between a) spread and yield stress of mortar (b) V-funnel flow time and
plastic viscosity of mortar 112
Figure 2-56 Comparison of Kurokawa and Sedran equations or (a) slump flow and yield stress b)time to 500 mm. slump flow and plastic viscosity 114
Figure 2-57 Relationships between a) slump flow and yield stress b) V-funnel (7.5*7.5 mm) time
and plastic viscosity for SCC 115
Figure 2-58 Relationship between a) slump flow and yield stress b) T500 nd plastic viscosity 116
Figure 4-1 Particle size distributions of powders 134
Figure 4-2 U-box test for concrete 140
Figure 4-3 Two-point workability apparatus 141
Figure 4-4 Helical impeller rheometer or mortar 144Figure 4-5 Rheomat 115 viscometer with a Rheoscan 115 control Unit and chart recorder 145
Figure 4-6 Effect of cup size on the two-point test measurement a) g value (b) h value 147
Figure 4-7 Test results or Mix 4-1 obtained with cup No. 3 and No. 5 (a) yield stress b) pl astic
viscosity 153
Figure 4-8 Comparison of (a) yield stress b) plastic viscosity obtained by cup No. 3 and No. 5 154
Figure 4-9 SRC concrete properties of mix 1 160
Figure 4- 10 Reproducibility of slump flow 161
Figure 4-11 Reproducibility of V-funnel flow time 161Figure 4-12 Reproducibility of T500 163
Figure 5-1 Effect of Conplast430 dosage on the properties of mortar with the superplasticizer added
at various delayed ime 169
Figure 5-2 Saturation dosage of superplasticizers etermined by (a) the spread est (b) the V-fu nneltest 171
Figure 5-3 Effect of delayed addition time of superplasticizer on (a) spread (b) V-funnel flow time
for mortar 173
Figure 5-4 Comparison of superplasticizer performance in terms of (a) spread (b) V-funnel flow
time 176
Figure 5-5 Change of slump flow and spread for concrete and mortar mixes 178
Figure 5-6 Change of V-funnel flow time for concrete and mortar mixes 178
Figure 5-7 Change of U-box filling height for concrete mixes with time 179
Figure 6-1 Development of the properties of the mixes with various w/c for 2 hours after mixing:
(a) spread (b) yield stress (c) V-funnel flow time (d) plastic viscosity (e) the time to 250
mrn spread 183
Figure 6-2 Comparison of the workability loss of the mixes with different w/c in terms of (a) yield
stress b) plastic viscosity 184
Figure 6-3 The effect of sp dosage on the change of properties in terms of spread for (a)
Conplast430 mixes (b) Glenium5l mixes, and yield stress or (c) Conplast430 mixes (d)
Glenium5l. mixes 187
8/10/2019 Thsen Mortar Ucl
12/397
List of figures 12
Figure 6-4 The effect of sp dosage on the development of plastic viscosity for a) Conplast430
mixes b) Glenium5l. mixes 188
Figure 6-5 Slump flow/spread etention of the concrete and mortar with various water/cement atio
191
Figure 6-6 The development of V-funnel flow time of the concrete and mortar with variouswater/cement atio 191
Figure 6-7 The development of plastic viscosity of the concrete and mortar with various
water/cement atio 192
Figure 6-8 The development of T500 or concrete and T250 or mortar with various water/cement
ratio 192
Figure 6-9 The change of U-box filling height with time for concrete with various water/cement
ratio 193
Figure 6-10 Development of properties of PC2 mortar mixes with various sand content for 2 hours
after mixing 195
Figure 6-11 Comparison of the workability loss for the mortar with various sand contents n terms of
a) yield stress b) plastic viscosity 196
Figure 6-12 Slump flow/spread oss of the concrete and mortar with various sand contents 198
Figure 6-13 Development of V-funnel flow time for the concrete and mortar with various sand
contents 198
Figure 6-14 The change of plastic viscosity with time for the concrete and mortar with various sand
contents 199
Figure 6-15 The change of T500and T250with time for the concrete and mortar with various sand
contents 199
Figure 6-16 The change of U-box filling height with time for the concrete with various sand contents
200
Figure 6-17 Development of properties of the mortar mixes with different types of cement for 2
hours after mixing: a) spread b) yield stress c) V-funnel flow time d) plastic
viscosity 202
Figure 6-18 Flow loss with time for concrete and mortar with different types of cement 204
Figure 6-19 Development of V-funnel flow time with time for the concrete and mortar with different
types of cement 204
Figure 6-20 Change of U-box filling height with time for the concrete with different types of cement
205
Figure 7-1 Workability retention of PC binary mixes 210
Figure 7-2 The factors affecting the change of yield stress and plastic viscosity 212
Figure 7-3 Workability retention of SRC binary mixes213
Figure 7-4 Effect of particle size on workability retention 216
Figure 7-5 Workability retention of CSF binary mixes 218
Figure 7-6 Effect of content of LSPIOO blend on workability retention in terms of a) spread b)
yield stress c) V-funnel flow time d) plastic viscosity 220
8/10/2019 Thsen Mortar Ucl
13/397
List of figures 13
Figure 7-7 The change of yield stress from 10-90 minutes after the start of mixing vs.
superpasticizer osage 222
Figure 7-8 The change of plastic viscosity from 10-90 minutes after the start of mixing vs. their
initial values 223
Figure 7-9 Slump flowand spread
ossof
binarymixes
forconcrete and mortar
227
Figure 7-10 Development of V-funnel flow time of binary mixes for concrete and mortar 227
Figure 7-11 The development of plastic viscosity of binary mixes for concrete and mortar 228
Figure 7-12 The change of U-box filling height with time for binary concrete mixes 228
Figure 7-13 Workability retention of SRC binary concrete n terms of a) slump flow b) V-funnel
flow time 229
Figure 7-14 U-box filling height for SRC binary mixes 230
Figure 8-1 Workability retention of ternary mixes 235
Figure 8-2 Effectof superplasticizer
osageand
nitialplastic viscosity on
the developmentof yield
stress and plastic viscosity 237
Figure 8-3 Workability retention of ternary mixes with various CSF content 239
Figure 8-4 Slump flow/spread development of ternary mixes for concrete and mortar 242
Figure 8-5 V-funnel flow time development of ternary mixes for concrete and mortar 242
Figure 8-6 Plastic viscosity development of ternary mixes for concrete and mortar 243
Figure 8-7 The change of U-box filling height with time for ternary mixes 243
Figure 9-1 Rheological property of Welan gum and cellulose solutions 247
Figure 9-2 Apparentviscosity of
Welangum
invarious solutions compared
ocellulose
248
Figure 9-3 Effect of mixing speed and ime on workability of Welan gum mixes 249
Figure 9-4 The effect of Welan gum level on the dosage of superplasticizers n mortar to achieve a
spread of 280 5 mm. 250
Figure 9-5 Effect of Welan gum and superplasticizer dosage on a) spread b) yield stress c) V-
funnel flow time d) plastic viscosity 252
Figure 9-6 Welan gum and superplasticizer ompatibility in terms of a) spread, b) yield stress c)
V-funnel flow time d) plastic viscosity 255
Figure 9-7 Welan gum and superplasticizer compatibility in terms of the relationship between a)yield stress and plastic viscosity, b) spread and plastic viscosity 256
Figure 9-8 Cellulose and superplasticizer compatibility in terms of the relationship between yield
stress and plastic viscosity 257
Figure 9-9 workability retention of Welan gum mixes with different types of superplasticzer 259
Figure 9-10 Setting time of Welan gum mixes with different types of superplasticizer 260
Figure 9-11 Strength development of Welan gum mixes with different types of superplasticizer 260
Figure 9-12 workability retention of single powder mix with various dosages f Welan gum 264
Figure 9-13 Comparison of workability retention of SRC mix and PC mix 265Figure 9-14 Effect of Welan gum content on setting ime of mortar 267
Figure 9-15 Effect of Welan gum on compressive strength development or mortar 267
Figure 9-16 Effect of Welan gum dosage on slump flow loss for concrete and spread oss or mortar
270
8/10/2019 Thsen Mortar Ucl
14/397
List of figures 14
Figure 9-17 Effect of Welan gum dosage on the development of V-funnel flow time for concrete and
mortar 270
Figure 9-18 Effect of Welan gum dosage on the development of plastic viscosity for concrete and
mortar 271
Figure 9-19 U-box filling height for the concrete with various Welan gum dosages 271Figure 9-20 Strength evelopment f Welan gum mixes 272
Figure 9-21 Workability etention f Welan gum mixes with various inary blends f powder 274
Figure 9-22 Setting imes and strength development or Welan gum mixes with binary blends of
powder 275
Figure 9-23 workability retention of Welan gum mixes with various binary blends of powder n
terms of Slump low/spread 278
Figure 9-24 workability retention of Welan gum concrete and mortar mixes with various binary
blends f powder n terms of V-funnel low time 278Figure 9-25 workability retention of Welan gum concrete and mortar mixes with various binary
blends f powder n terms of plastic viscosity 279
Figure 9-26 The change f U-box filling height with time for Welan gum mixes with various ypes
binary blends f powder 279
Figure 10-1 The measured heology of a mortar with overdosed superplasticizer 283
Figure 10-2 Rheology of the mortars with varying GGBS content 285
Figure 10-3 Bingham material and shear hinning material n two-point test 286
Figure 10-4 Rheology of the CSF mix compared o the 100 PC mix 287
Figure 10-5 The relationship between shear stress and shear ate for the mixes with various types of
superplasticizer 289
Figure 10-6 Effect of Welan gum dosage on the relationship between shear stress and shear ate 289
Figure 10-7_ The relationship between yield stress and spread or mortar 291
Figure 10-8 The relationship between yield stress and spread 292
Figure 10-9 A comparison of the two relationships between yield stress and spread 292
Figure 10-10 Effect of hydration time on the yield stress-spread elationship 294
Figure 10-11 Effect of sand content on the yield stress-spread elationship 294
Figure 10-12 Effect of GGBS and CSF on the yield stress vs spread elationship 296
Figure 10-13 Effect LSPs on the yield stress vs spread elationship 296
Figure 10-14 The relationship between plastic viscosity and he V-funnel flow time for mortar 298
Figure 10-15 The relationship between plastic viscosity and Wunnel flow time of mortar after
elimination of some data 298
Figure 10-16 Comparison of the relationships between plastic viscosity and Wunnel flow time 299
Figure 10-17 Effectof
SRC, LSP15and
high dosageof
Welangum on the plastic viscosity-V-funnel
flow time relationship 300
Figure 10-18 The relationship between Land T250 303
Figure 10-19 The relationship between g and T250 or different types of mixes 303
Figure 10-20 The principle for V-funnel test and spread est 304
Figure 10-21 Comparison of the relationships between g-T25o nd p-Tv for some mixes 304
8/10/2019 Thsen Mortar Ucl
15/397
8/10/2019 Thsen Mortar Ucl
16/397
List of tables 16
List of tables
Table 1-1 Examples of applications of SCC 29
Table 2-1 The types of powder composition applied 43 SCCs n Japanese onstruction up to 1999)35
Table 2-2 A comparison of test methods eported n Japan 49
Table 2-3 Summaries f the different mix design methods 51
Table 2-4 Comparison of the superplasticizer adsorbed by various type of cement, binder and
constituents of cement 53
Table 2-5 Retained water/powder atio and deformation coefficient 56
Table 2-6 The comparison of calculated plastic viscosity of pastes using data n table 2-5 59
Table 2-7 Mix proportions of the concrete with various ypes of sand 74Table 2-8 The criteria of mortar property o achieve successful SCC 96
Table 2-9 Test results or fresh properties of concrete and mortar component 97
Table 2-10 Equations or plastic viscosity of paste 107
Table 2-11 Equations or plastic viscosity of mortar and concrete 110
Table 3-1 Scope of test programme 130
Table 4-1 Composition of Portland cement and sulfate resisting cement 131
Table 4-2 Composition and physical properties of powder 132
Table 4-3 Details of admixtures 135
Table 4-4 Properties of sand and coarse aggregate 136
Table 4-5 List of tests or mortar and concrete 137
Table 4-6 The geometry of cups 146
Table 4-7 Test results or calibration 150
Table 4-8 test results or calibration 151
Table 4-9 Mix proportions or cup size effect study 152
Table 4- 10 Results of test in mortar in a ViscoCorder, cylinder viscometer and the Rheometer withhelical impeller: Cross comparison 155
Table 4-11 Mortar test results or reproducibility assessment 159
Table 4-12 Repeatability and reproducibility analyses or slump flow and V-funnel of concrete 162
Table 4-13 Repeatability of two-point test results or concrete. 164
Table 4-14 Repeatability and reproducibility of mortar tests and concrete ests 165
Table 5-1 Mix proportion and mixing procedure of concrete 177
Table 5-2 Mix proportion of the concrete as a reference mix 177
Table 6-1 Mix proportions and nitial properties of the mortar with various water/cement atios 182Table 6-2 Mix proportions and the initial properties of mortar with w/c=0.45 185
Table 6-3 Mix proportions and nitial properties or concrete and mortar with va ious water/ce ment
ratio 190
Table 6-4 Mix proportions and nitial properties or mortar with various sand contents 194
8/10/2019 Thsen Mortar Ucl
17/397
List of tables 17
Table 6 5 Mix proportions and nitial properties of concrete and mortar with varying sand content
197
Table 6 6 Mix proportions of mortar with different types of cement 201
Table 6 7 Mix proportion and initial properties of concrete and mortar with different types of
cement 203
Table 7 1 Mix proportions and nitial properties of various binary mixes 209
Table 7 2 Mix proportions and nitial properties of LSPs binary powder mixes 214
Table 7 3 Mix proportions and nitial properties of CSF binary powder mixes 217
Table 7 4 Mix proportions and nitial properties of LSP 100 binary powder mixes 219
Table 7 5 Mix proportions and nitial properties of binary mixes for concrete and mortar 226
Table 8 1 Mix proportions and nitial properties of CSF ternary mixes and reference mixes 234
Table 8 2 Mix proportions and initial properties of PCIGGBS/CSF ernary mixes and PCIGGBS
binary mix 238
Table 8 3 Mix proportion and nitial properties of ternary mixes for concrete and mortar 241
Table 9 1 Mix proportions of reference mixes with various types of superplasticzer and their
properties 254
Table 9 2 Mix proportions and initial properties of Welan gum mixes with three different types of
superplasticzer 257
Table 9 3 Mix proportion and fresh properties of Welan gum mix with two types of
superplasticzers 261
Table 9 4 Mix proportion and nitial properties of mortar with different content of Welan gum 262
Table 9 5 Mix proportion and initial properties for concrete and mortar with various Welan gumdosage 268
Table 9 6 Mix proportions of and initial properties of Welan gum mixes with various types ofbinary blends of powder 273
Table 9 7 Mix proportions and initial properties of Welan gum concrete and mortar with different
binary blends of powder 276
Table 10 1 Mix proportions or GGBS mixes and flowing properties 284
Table 10 2 The mix proportion and resh properties or the mix with various types of admixtures288Table 10 3 The relationships between he properties of mortar discussed 290
Table 10 4 An example or the effect of spread on V funnel flow time 301
Table 10 5 Correlation coefficients for the relationships between he properties of mortar 306
Table 10 6 The relationship discussed etween concrete properties 307
Table 10 7 Correlation coefficient for the relationship between he properties or concrete 311
Table 10 8 The discussed elationships between he properties of concrete and ts mortar component
314
Table 10 9 The discussedrelationships
betweenproperties of concrete and mortar
324
Table 10 10 Properties of satisfying SCC according o UCL mix design 329
Table AM Guide ine for JSCE mix design method or SCC with viscosity agent 352
Table A1 2 Ranks or self compactability and corresponding arget values 352
Table A1 3 Limiting mix proportions for successful self compacting concrete 358
8/10/2019 Thsen Mortar Ucl
18/397
List of tables 18
Table AM
Table A3-2
Table A3-3
Table A3-4
Table A4-1
Table A4-2
Table A4-3
Table A4-4
Table A4-5
Table A5-1
Table A5-2Table A5-3
Table A5-4
Table A6-1
Table A6-2
Table A6-3
Table A6-4
Table A7-1
Table A7-2
Table A7-3
Table A7-4
Table A7-5
Table A8-1
Table A8-2
Table A8-3
Table A8-4
Table A8-5
Table A8-6
Table A8-7
g and h values measured with different cups n series 1 360
g and h values measured with different cups n series 2 360
g and h values measured with different cups n series 2 361
g and h values measured with different cups n series 4 361
Test results or calibration using 1.0 Welan gum solution 362
Constants obtained rom the regression equation 362
Test results or rheological property of welan gum solution measured using rheomat 115
with D 145 cylinder impeller 363
Test results or rheological property of welan gum solution measured using rheomat 115
with helical impeller 364
Constants obtained rom the regression equation 364
Proportions of the mix for cup size further study. 365
Test results or Mix 4-1: 100 PC366
Test results or Mix 4-2: PCILSP 100 60/40 366
Test results or Mix 4-2 WG = 0.075 sp = 0.1 366
Reproducibility of the fresh properties or mortar 367
Test results or repeatability and reproducibility of concrete 367
Repeatability and reproducibility analyses or slump flow and Wunnel of concrete 368
Repeatability of the results or two-point test for concrete 368
Effect of mixing methods on Conplast430 saturation dosage and maximum workability
(mortar tests) 369Determination of Saturation dosage or each ype of superplasticizer mortar test) 369
The effect of addition time of superplasticizers n their efficiency (mortar tests) 370
The workability retention of mixes with different types of superplasticizer mortar tests)
371
Comparison of the properties of concrete and mortar mixes with different types of
superplasticizer nd different mixing methods 372
Workability retention of mortar with various water/cement atios 373
Effect of superplasticizer osage on workability retention of mortar 374
Workability retention of concrete and mortar with various water/cement atios 375
Workability retention of mortar with various sand contents 376
workability retention of mortar with different type of cement 376
Workability retention of concrete and mortar with various sand contents 377
Workability retention of concrete and mortar with different type of cement 378
Table A9-1 Binary powder mortar
Table A9-2 LSP binary mixes with different particle sizes of LSP powder
Table A9-3 CSF binary powder mixes
Table A9-4 LSP 100 binary powder mixes with various contentTable A9-5 Binary powder concrete and mortar mixesTable A 10-1 CSF ternary blends of powder mortar mixes and reference mixes
Table AIO-2 PC/CSF/GGBS ernary blends of powder and PC/GGBS binary mortar mixes
379
380
381
382
383
385
386
8/10/2019 Thsen Mortar Ucl
19/397
List of tables 19
Table AIO 3 Ternary blends of powder mixes and the reference mix of concrete and mortar 387
TableAll I Rheological properties of Welan gum and cellulose solutions n water 388
Table Al. 1 2 Rheological properties of Welan gum and cellulose solutions in deionized and filtered
cement water 389
Table Al 1 3 Welangum efficiency with
differentmixing conditions and mixing
times in termsof
spread 389
Table Al.1 4 Welan gum and superplasticizer ompatibility n terms of spread 389
Table Al 1 5 Effect of Welan gum content on superplasticizer aturation dosage and maximum
workability 389
Table A12 1 Welan gurn/superplasticzer ompatibility in terms of setting ime 390
Table A12 2 Welan gurn/superplasticzer ompatibility in terms of initial fresh properties 390
Table A12 3 Welan gurn/superplasticzer ompatibility in terms of workability retention 391
Table A12 4 Welan gurn/superplasticzer ompatibility in terms of strength development 391Table A13 1 Workability retention of Welan gum mortars with single type of powder 392
Table A 13 2 Strength development of Welan gum mortar with single types of powder 393
Table A13 3 Setting imes of Welan gum mortar with single types of powder 393
Table A13 4 The effect of Welan gum dosage on the properties of concrete and mortar mixes with
single type of powder 394
Table A13 5 Workability retention of Welan gum binary mortar mixes 395
Table A13 6 Strength development of Welan gum binary mortar mixes 396
Table A13 7 Setting ime of Welan gum binary mortar mixes 396Table A13 8 Properties of Welan gum binary concrete and mortar mixes 396
Table A14 1.
Effect of segregation 397
Table A14 2 Effect of GGBS content 397
Table A14 3 Shear hinning property of CSF binary mixTable A14 4 Effect of viscocrete
Table A14 5 Effect of Welan gum
398
398
398
8/10/2019 Thsen Mortar Ucl
20/397
List of symbols 20
List of symbols
All symbols are used as defined unless hey are defined mmediately after being used
in the text.
LSP50 imestone owder with particleA air content size nominally smaller han 75
A/C aggregate/cement atio by microns
weight LSP 15 imestone owder with particleAE air entraining agent size nominally smaller han 15
C cement ontent by weight micronsC.A. coarse ggregate N impeller speed n two-point est
CRMs cement eplacement aterials NC normal concreteCSF condensed ilica fume PC portland cementDD. R. dry drodded ulk density of PFA pulverised ly ash
aggregate s/a sand total aggregate atio
D. spread f mortar n diameter SCC self-compacting oncreteDmax maximum size of aggregate SF slump low
EP deformation oefficient of a sp superplasticizer
powder SRC sulphate-resisting ement
F. A. fine aggregate SSD superplasticizer aturation
f compressive trength dosage
G K calibration coefficient or two - Tv V-funnel flow time in mortar
point machine and concrete estsGGBS ground granulated lag
T250 time for a mortar spread o 250
9 rheological onstant y two- mm. n diameter n spread est
point test elated o ToT500 time for a concrete low to 500
h rheological onstant y two- mm. n diameter n slump low
point test elated o g test
LSP limestone owderTu-bo ime for concrete low to
LSPIOO limestone owder with 250 mm. illing height n U box
particle size nominally smaller test
than 150 micronsVa volume of airVC. A. volume of coarse ggregate
8/10/2019 Thsen Mortar Ucl
21/397
List of symbols 21
V. volume of mortarVGGBS volume of GGBS
VLSP volume of LSP
VP volume of powderVPFA volume of PFA
VS volume of sand
V, /V. sand/mortar atio by volume
V, volume of water
V, Np water/powder atio by volumeUH U box filling height mm)
W water content by weight
W/C water/cement atioWC. A. proportion of coarse aggregate
by weight in concreteWC. A. DD. R. the ratio of coarse
aggregate weight to dry rodded
bulk density
WG Welan gum
W/P water powder ratio by weight
r. mortar spread atio,
Dm)2
-O0)
volume concentration of solid
phase
OM maximum volume
concentration of solidphase
intrinsic viscosity of the
suspension elated to
characteristic of particle shape
R. relative V-funnel flow speed
for mortar,TV
10
TO yield stress
Ir shear tress
shear ate
9 plastic viscosity
OP retained water/powder ratio of
a powder,
71 apparent viscosity
11re relative viscosity of a
suspension o its liquid medium
8/10/2019 Thsen Mortar Ucl
22/397
Glossary of terms 22
Glossary of terms
In many workability studies including those on SCC, much confusion has beencaused y the careless se of terminology. Therefore, ome erminology used n this
thesis s clarified at this stage.
Apparent VISCOSItY (Ilapp)
The viscosity of a non-Newtonian material at the particular shear rate under
consideration, iven by the of the slope of the straight ine drawn rom the origin to
the appropriate oint on the low curve.
Filling ability
Used to describe he ability of SCC to fill a container with or without obstacles. It is
evaluated by the quantity of concrete lowing into a container, or the height of filling.
Many test methods have been used, most of them imitating part of a real structure.
Flowability or Fluidity or Deformability
A property of fresh concrete ndicating the ease of flowing under gravity and external
forces [1]. This is evaluated by the amount of deformation after a concrete ceases o
flow, i. e. flowing capacity, and the flowing speed. In an RILEM report [2] fillingability was used to describe his property for no specific reason, but in this project
flowability will be used. The meaning of filling ability in this project is more
specific.
Ionic strength (lo)
A function expressing he effect of the charge of the ions in a solution, equal to the
sum of the molality of each type of ion present (mi) multiplied by the square of its
;.. miz iharge(ZI). Io =E2 [31
8/10/2019 Thsen Mortar Ucl
23/397
Glossary of terms 23
Passing ability or non-blocking property
This describes he ability of SCC o pass hrough obstacles r narrow openings, uch
as gaps between einforcement. t is evaluated y measuring he quantity of concrete
passinghrough he
obstacles,he filling height
onthe downstream
ide orflowing
speed.
Powder
Fine materials that have particle sizes the same as or finer than PC, such as cement
replacement materials and nert fillers.
Pseudoplastic material
A material which can be represented y a power-law model of the form
-r = 0
where k,n are constants.
Retained water/powder ratio (0p), deformation coefficient (Ep)
The retained water/powder ratio is that at which flow of paste s about to commence
under self weight in a flow-spread test (This is the same as the spread est for mortar,
which will be introduced in chapter 2). This water is physically and chemically
retained by powder and so has no contribution to flow. The deformation coefficient
is a measure of sensitivity to increasing water content as shown in Figure T-1.
8/10/2019 Thsen Mortar Ucl
24/397
Glossary of terms 24
V, Np
pp
rm
FigureT-1 The definition of retained water/powder ratio (Pp) and deformation
coeff lcient (E P) Im = (Dm2
100
Rheology
Rheology is defined as the science of the deformation and flow of matter , which
means hat it is concerned with relationship between stress, strain rate, and time (BS
5168: 1975). It can result in quantitative fundamental erms, associated with modelsdescribing the relationship between stress, and strain. For example, the Bingham
model is
I- =TO + jl
where o, g constants.
Another example is Herschel-Bulkely model which describes a flow curve of the
power-law pseudoplastic ype but with the addition of a yield value:
r=ro +W
where o, , n are constants.
Shear thickening material
A material whose flow curve is concave towards the stress axis because he shear
stress s increasing more rapidly than the shear ate.
8/10/2019 Thsen Mortar Ucl
25/397
8/10/2019 Thsen Mortar Ucl
26/397
Chapter Introduction 26
Chapter 1
Introduction
This chapter introduces the concept of self-compacting concrete (SCQ and its
application, the background to the research project presented n this thesis and the
thesis structure.
1.1 Concept and applications of SCC
Self-compacting concrete s concrete which under its own weight will flow into place
through and around reinforcement and form a compact, uniform, void free mass
without the need or any vibration. It was first developed n Japan n 1988, since then
it has had continually increasing use worldwide.
SCC was initially called High Perfonnance Concrete . It was defined as concrete
that had the following properties at three stages 6],
1) fresh stage: self-compactability,
2) early age: avoidance of initial defects,
3) hardened stage: protection against external factors.
At almost the same ime, 'Ifigh Performance Concrete was defined by Gagne et al
[7] as a concrete with high durability due to a low water/cement ratio. Self-
compacting concrete therefore became the name given to concrete with self-
compactability in the fresh stage, with no specific requirement for early age or
hardened properties.
There are hree key properties hat distinguish SCC rom other ypes of concrete:
e It must flow under self-weight at a reasonable ate; high flowing capacity and
proper flowing speed are thus required, .e. high flowability.
8/10/2019 Thsen Mortar Ucl
27/397
8/10/2019 Thsen Mortar Ucl
28/397
Chapter Introduction 28
It can be seen hat in terms of components t can be classified into two types: SCC
with and without viscosity agent.
The proven advantages f SCC nclude [9]:
reduced concrete placing time,
reduced abour costs,
improved concrete durability, especially n the cover zone,
lower noise evels during placing,
elimination of the harmful effects of vibration,
automation of construction.
The disadvantages f SCC include [9]:
9 increased cost of materials because of higher cementitious and admixture content
than normal concrete, normally 25 to 50 higher [10],
the need or more rigorous production and quality control,
a greater endency o plastic shrinkage on exposed surfaces,
the lack of suitable standardised est methods o assess he fresh properties,the need or efficient mixing procedures,
the possibility of increased ormwork pressures,
difficulties of surface inishing on exposed lat slabs,
increased blowholes in vertical faces of wall.
Many of these disadvantages an and have been overcome by attention to details of
and modifications to production and construction procedures.
After its initial development, SCC was used in the first half of 1990s in heavily
reinforced structures, n massive structures, and for architectural concrete, in all of
which the quality of concrete and/or the speed of construction were particularlyimportant. In other words, in situations where [11]:
the full compaction of concrete with vibration is not possible or extremely
difficult;
a greatly improved reliability of the structure s expected;
e rationalization of work including labour savings, energy savings and shortening of
the construction period is anticipated.
8/10/2019 Thsen Mortar Ucl
29/397
Chapter Introduction 29
Table 1-1 Examples of applications of SCC
Case Date Structure Details Strength Concrete BenefitNo. required volume
MPa) m)
1 1996- Sandwich An mmersed unnel, he 30 6000 per Saves einforcing ar
1998 composite 12] components re steel month arrangement nd orm
shell and SCC work, educes itework
2 1994 Concrete illed Acomposite tructure 60 Avoids efects ue o poorsteel ube 13] consisting f steel ubes vibration n a complex
filledwithconcrete structure3 11/92- Anchorage f Mass oncrete, lacing 24 290,000 Saves onstruction ime
03/94 Akashi alkyo rate 1900 m3per day andlabourbridge 14,15]
4 08/97- Tank or LNG Mass oncrete lacing 60 12,000 Increases n he height f06/98 storage 16] into prestressed oncrete each oncrete ift,reduces
structure construction eriods, aveslabour.
5 1996 Precast oncrete Complicated nd hin Production f various? [17] concrete anels shape nd size products
6 1998 Bridge [ 18] Reinforced concrete 70
structure
230 Very high quality
7 1999 Millennium point Complex and congested 60 400 Easy of use and reduced[19] reinforcement in 400 steel placing times
tubes
8 1997 Railway bridge Long span bridge beam 50 High quality concrete
20] construction
1-5 In Japan, 6 in Sweden, 7 in UK. 8 in China
More recently several attempts have been made to use SCC as an alternative to
normal workability concrete for normal structural applications. Table 1-1 shows
some examples of applications, rom which it is clear that SCC embraces nearly all of
the range of early age and hardened properties of conventional workability concrete
strength and durability etc; therefore it should not be thought of as a specialist
concrete with a narrow range of properties.
1.2 Research background
As outlined above, the development of SCC has assisted mprovement in processes
within the construction industry. Worldwide interest has spread rapidly since it was
8/10/2019 Thsen Mortar Ucl
30/397
8/10/2019 Thsen Mortar Ucl
31/397
Chapter Introduction 31
users hroughout Europe o identify with confidence whether or not SCC has he three
key properties mentioned above.
Research on SCC at University College London has been carried out since 1993,
initially on SCC production using the materials available in UK, which has led to
establishment of a rational mix design method [25].
The investigation reported n this thesis followed on from this, and concentrated on
the effect of types and amount of powder materials, admixtures, sand and water
content on the fresh properties of SCC. These were studied nitially by mortar tests,
and then some important results were confirmed on concrete. Mortar was testedbecause t has properties similar to those of the concrete tself; it contains all of the
materials except coarse aggregate, and the effect of the test variables will be similar
to those n the concrete; t is also more convenient han testing concrete, and hence a
large range of variables can be assessed fficiently.
The research consisted of three stages:
1. Establishment of the experimental conditions including examination of physical
and chemical properties of the constituent materials, selection of test methods anddevelopment of a two-point workability test for mortar.
2. Determination of mixing procedure and selection of a superplasticizer.
Investigation of workability and workability retention, setting time and hardened
properties of various SCC mixes by mortar tests, with the main effects then
examined by tests on concrete. The types of SCC mixes included,
9a powder type SCC including single type of powder mix, binary and ternary
blends of powder mixes,
an SCC with viscosity agent ncluding single type of powder mix and binary0powder mix.
3. An analysis f the results rom the second tage o establish redictability of fresh
properties of concrete rom correspondent mortar properties, and the relationshipsbetween the measured properties for mortar and concrete, rheological behaviour
of some mixes.
8/10/2019 Thsen Mortar Ucl
32/397
Chapter Introduction 32
1.3 Thesis structure
Chapter 2 is a detailed review of the relevant iterature. This is followed by chapter 3
which presents he aims and scope of research, and chapter 4 which describes he
materials and test methods. The majority of experimental results are reported in
chapters 5 to 9 with supplementary experiments for the necessity of discussion
presented n chapter 10. These are,
mixing procedures and selection of superplasticizer, n chapter 5;
fresh properties of the mixes with single type of powder, in chapter 6;fresh properties of the mixes with binary blends of powder, in chapter 7;
fresh properties of the mixes with ternary blends of type of powder, in chapter 8;
properties of mixes with viscosity agent, n chapter 9,
Chapter 10 presents he analyses and discussions of the test results from stage 2, this
includes,
rheology model of some mortar mixes,
relationships between he fresh properties or mortar and concrete,
modified Feret's rule for strength prediction.
Chapter 11 gives conclusions and recommendation or future work.
8/10/2019 Thsen Mortar Ucl
33/397
Chapter 2 Literature review 33
Chapter 2
Literaturereview
The first international paper on SCC was presented by Ozawa at the second East-Asia
and Pacific Conference on Structural Engineenng and Construction EASEC-2) in
January 1989, a year after the first SCC was produced [26]. It attracted worldwide
interest and led to a number of development programmes, initially in Japan, and more
recently in Europe and other countries. Many papers have subsequently been
published on this subject, and the number of papers collected in UCL until 1999 is
shown in figure 2-1. Clearly SCC research development and use has increased
rapidly in recent years throughout the world with an exception in 1997).n,
80
70
60
a- 50mCL0 40
.92
E 30ZZ
20
10
0
Figure 2-1 Published papers on SCC collected in UCL until 1999
For thischapter, much of the published
literaturewas reviewed, concentrating on
materials, test methods, mix design, fresh properties, rheology, hardened properties
and durability, and mixing procedures. Because he focus of this project is on the
properties obtained in the laboratory, discussion of literature on topics such as
manufacturing and construction procedures s not included in this chapter. Some of
86-88 89-90 90-92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99
Years
8/10/2019 Thsen Mortar Ucl
34/397
Chapter 2 Literature review 34
the papers reviewed were published during the course of the research and have
influenced the subsequent xperimental work.
2.1 Materials used in SCC
Generally, lmost any material hat s suitable or normal concrete an be ncorporated
in SCC. The number of types of materials used n an SCC mix is normally more than
that in a normal concrete.
2.1.1 Powders
A variety of powder materials have been used n SCC because of the advantages of
being able to select he powder composition. Three main types of powder are used,
Cements, such as Portland cement (PC), high Belite cement, etc.
Cementreplacement materials (CRMs), such as pulverised fly ash (PFA), ground
granulated blast furnace slag (GGBS), and condensed ilica fume (CSF).
9 Inert or near-inert materials, such as imestone powder (LSP).
None of these are specially manufactured r processed or use n SCC.
The overall powder compositions used nclude:
1. Single cementitious materials: e. g. PC, high Belite cement, low heat cement,
moderate heat cement;
8/10/2019 Thsen Mortar Ucl
35/397
Chapter 2 Literature review 35
2. Binary or ternary blends of PC with CRMs or fine filler; e.g.
GGBS
PFA
PC + LSP
GGBS + PFA
GGBS + LSP
GGBS + PFA + LSP
3. Combinations of alternative types of cement (other than PC) with CRMs or
fine fillers.
Table 2-1 The types of powder composition applied In 43 SCCs In Japanese
construction (up to 1999)
composition of the binder I applications ( )
100 PC 13
GGBS cement 24
High Belite cementlmoderate or low heat cement 8
Early strength cement 2
Binary mixes (cement + pfa, cement + ggbs, or cement + Isp) 30
Ternary mixes 23
Table 2.1 shows a summary f different powder compositions sed n SCC n Japan
from the references ollected at UCL. These igures depend o a certain extent on the
availability of the various materials, or example, GGBS s widely used, and several
different inenesses re available n Japan. However, t still shows wo distinguishing
features n respect f the use of powder n SCC compared o normal concrete.
Firstly, cement other than normal Portland cement such as high Belite cement, ow
heat or moderate heat cement s often used. It is claimed that superplasticizer an
disperse ow CA, and C4AF content cements uch as high Belite cement and ow heat
cement more effectively [27]; however, this may be not the case when the
superplasticizer s added at sometime after the mix water. 11igh Belite cement
reduces he heat of hydration and is ideal for use n high strength self compacting
concrete 8].
8/10/2019 Thsen Mortar Ucl
36/397
Chapter 2 Literature review 36
Secondly, binary and ternary blends of powders, such as those shown above are often
used or the following benefits:
improved flowability,e.g. with
PFAor
LSPat
lowwater/powder ratios;
improved plastic viscosity, e. g. with GGBS at higher water/powder ratios;
reduced heat of hydration in large pours.
Microsilica has had imited amount of use, mainly because t has much less amount of
replacement to reduce heat of hydration than other CRMs, but may have other
benefits therefore may be worth investigation.
It is important to note that binary or ternary blended cements differ from the powders
mixed on site. They are ball-mill blended by mixing high-fineness granulated blast
furnace slag powder and fly ash at low temperatures. These cements have a higher
packing ratio, and therefore give better fluidity of the paste [8].
The effect of powder composition and the chemical-physical properties of particles on
the fresh properties of SCC is reviewed n section 2.4.1.
2.1.2 Admixtures
All SCC contains a superplasticizer oprovide
high flowability. Thosesuccessfully
used are mainly based on naphthalene sulfonates, melamine sulfonates, vinyl
copolymers, amino sulfonates, and polycarboxylic acids [8]. Recently, admixtures
possessing both superplasticizing and viscosity modifying properties have been
produced, such as Viscocrete (a Sika product).
In Japan an air entraining water reducing agent (AE) is often used to improve freeze-
thaw resistance as well as in fluidity. Many other countries have no particular
requirement or air content, and herefore nAE is not necessarily sed.
Many different kinds of viscosity agent have been used e. g. cellulose-based ater
soluble polymers, acrylic-based water-soluble polymer and inorganic viscosity agents
8/10/2019 Thsen Mortar Ucl
37/397
Chapter 2 Literature review 37
etc. Those can be classified into three types, according to their mechanism of action
[8]:
1) adsorption on the surface of particles, forming bridge structures between the
particles,hence mparting
viscosity;2) absorbing water and swelling o impart viscosity;
3) dissolving n water with links between ts own molecules o increase iscositythis type is also called non-adsorptive viscosity agents. .
The first two types reduce lowabilitY while increasing plastic viscosity, but the third
type can increase plastic viscosity without any effect on yield stress. The first type
includes cellulose-based water-soluble polymers and acrylic-based water-soluble
polymers. The second type includes bio-polymers polysachharide polymers,
microorganisms, and inorganic compounds. Glycol-based water-soluble polymer
belongs o the third type, which have more benefit to SCC, but an example of this was
not available at the time of research, and one of second ype, Welan gum, common in
the UK, was used. This is a heavy, inear polysaccharide produced by a fermentation
process. It can adsorb mixing water and has an impact on the overall rheology of the
mix by modifying the rheology of mix water, hence t is also known as a rheology-
modifying admixture RMA).
Recently, a new viscosity agent, based on colloidal silica, has also been used,however, detailed nformation about ts mechanism has not been obtained.
2.1.3 Aggregates
All types of aggregate used n normal concrete can be used in SCC. The maximum
size of coarse aggregate aries from 10 to 40 mm. according o the minimum clearancebetween reinforcements and the reinforcement and the formwork. It has been
reported that the ratio of clear space between rebars, o maximum aggregate adius
should be higher than 243-) for a one-dimensional mesh or 2+2NE) for a two-
dimensional mesh [28]. In general, aggregate smaller than 20 mm is often used,
especially 10-15 mm, because he concrete is more stable [29]. There is also a
requirement for the maximum quantity of coarse aggregate, which is normally 50-
8/10/2019 Thsen Mortar Ucl
38/397
8/10/2019 Thsen Mortar Ucl
39/397
8/10/2019 Thsen Mortar Ucl
40/397
Chapter 2 Literature review 40
in this project.
The slump flow test is very simple and easy to operate, and therefore can be used both
in the laboratory and on construction sites. It is however important to recognise that
operator experiences may affect the result [32].
100
00f)
a)
70 mm- -- ---- -- - --*
MM)
160
mm
do 100 nm
b)
Figure2-2 Flowability tests: a) slump flow test for concrete, b) spread test for
mortar
A funnel flow test, such as V-funnel and 0-funnel tests, s the most common method
of testing flow velocity when passing through narrow space that intimate space
between reinforcements. In the V-funnel test concrete commences wo dimensional
flow, which is same as when concrete passes hrough reinforce bars in structure, while
it has three dimensional flow in 0-funnel test, therefore V-funnel test is more
commonly used. This method evaluates he flowing speed hrough narrow opening,
which involves passing ability and viscosity of fresh SCC, and to evaluate this, the
time to sec) from opening the orifice to the first daylight appealing when looking
vertically down through the funnel is measured and recorded.
1
1
(b)
Figure 2-3 V-funnel tests for (a) concrete and (b) mortar
C14
81
This method can also be used to evaluate the segregation resistance of SCC. For
example, in V-funnel test a flowing time t5 (seconds) is measured after placing
concrete n the funnel and wait for 5 minutes, and the result is compared with the
flowing time to (seconds) measured mmediately after placing concrete n the funnel.
A segregation ndex Sf can be expressed y Sf = (t5-tO)/tO if t5 < to, then Sf = 0.
V-funnel flow time is also affected by flowing capacity, concrete with larger slump
flow tends to resultin
a shorterflow
time even when plastic viscosity is unchanged[2].
Many different ypes of funnel have been proposed, or example, or a V-funnel, the
size of the opening at the bottom of V-funnel can be varied, such as 55x75 mm,
65x75 mm, 75x75 mm.openings. The V-funnel with 75x75 mm.opening, which was
proposedy Ozawa
et al[33] for SCC
with maximum coarse aggregate ize20 mm,
is used n UCL (figure 2-3) since 1995; he one with 65X75 mm opening s used a
standard pparatus y JSCE since 1998 3 1 .
The suggested V-funnel flow time is 4-20 seconds by the JSCE [31] for 65x75 mm.
opening and 4-10 seconds y Chai [23] for 75x75 mrn opening. Lower flow times
75 75
k(MM) F
.221m (MM)
8/10/2019 Thsen Mortar Ucl
42/397
Chapter 2 Literature review 42
may indicate a mix with insufficient viscosity for adequate tability; higher flow times
with discontinuous flow may show a segregated oncrete where aggregate particles
separate and bridge at the orifice.
A smaller scale V-funnel est s also used or mortar flgure 2-3 b)). The difference
is that the opening size s 6 times of the maximum size of sand, suggesting hat t is
not measuring assing ability and segregation ut flowing speed elated o apparent
viscosity.
This test method s simple and easy o operate and, as with the slump flow test, care s
needed when operating.
2.2.2 Passing ability tests
As well as the V-funnel test designed above, a number of passing ability tests have
been used, such as the U-box test, the L-box test and the J-ring test. Unlike the funneltest, these methods measure he passing ability through a mesh of bars.
One of the commonly used methods is the U-box test. It was first developed by
Matusuoka and Shindo, who called it the U-shape box test. There were several
versions of this. Okamura and Ozawa modified it by changing the curved bottom to
flat asshown
n figure 2-4)after
findingout that
it is thenmore sensitive to concrete
with low segregation esistance 34].
Three different obstacles can be used n the U-box. Obstacle 1 Rl) is made of DIO
mm bars with four 35 mm clear gap between ars, obstacle R2) of 13 mm bars and
45-35-35-45 mm clear spacing, ndobstacle R3) has no bars.
The concrete lowing can be observed hrough a transparent wall on one side of the
compartment. A fill the height of over 300 mm in compartment B is judged as
satisfaction elf compactability. Concrete with low flowing ability or plastic viscosity
will not reach his height due o low deformation r high segregation. This has ound
to be an effective and convenient est, with the measurement f final height being
8/10/2019 Thsen Mortar Ucl
43/397
Chapter 2 Literature review 43
readily interpreted n terms of an acceptance riterion.
unit:mm
cXrent wall
obstacles R1 obstacles R2 obstacles R3
Figure 2-4 U Box test
An L-shaped box with reinforcement at the opening is also used in some countries
such as Sweden figure 2-5). Measurements hat have been used nclude flow times
to 200 and 400 mm flow, and the ratio of the final heights 112/1-11 s shown in the
figure. Also, some workers record flow distance by measuring the distance between
the gate and edge of the flow. An advantage of such a test is that the flow can easily
be visually assessed, nd any tendency o block or segregate s immediately apparent.
It is also easily dismantled and reassembled or cleaning. However, a general agreed
criterion is more. difficult to define than the U-box type test an acceptable values for
112/111, s according o Swedish experience 0.80-0.85.
8/10/2019 Thsen Mortar Ucl
44/397
Chapter 2 Literature review 44
600
Figure 2-5 L-shape test adapted from [35])
J-ring in Paisley 300 mm in diameter) J-ring in Japan
adapted from [371) adapted from [38])
Figure 2-6 J-ring tests
AJ ring test is simpler than both these tests. Figure 2-6 shows the two types of J ring
- one from Paisley [36,37] and one from Japan [38]. The major difference between
them is that the top part of the J ring in Japan is blocked; therefore the function of
openings is equal to a two dimensional mesh. A fixed quantity of concrete is
introduced into the ring, e. g. from a slump test carried out inside the ring, and allowed
to flow through the bars until flow ceases. The passing ability is assessed by the
unit: mm
8/10/2019 Thsen Mortar Ucl
45/397
Chapter Literature eview 45
average ratio of the height of concrete retained inside the ring at approx. 200 mm,
diameter, o the average height outside the ring, or otherwise assessed y the height of
concrete inside the ring. Overall diameter of flow was measured and tendency to
block or segregation also recordedby
visual assessmenty
some workers.Only a
small amount of concrete is needed compared to U-box and L-box tests, but no
preferred r suggested alues or this method have been published.
2.2.3 Segregation tests
Several test methods have been proposed, aiming specifically at quantifying the
resistance to segregation, such as surface settlement test test in fresh state),
penetration test for rapid evaluation of resistance o segregation test in fresh state)
and segregation est test in hardened state). The detailed method description can be
found in referenc [2]. However, there are no general agreed criteria for these tests,
and as mentioned earlier, none of these segregation est methods has been generally
accepted and no routine methods are available at present.As discussed the
segregation can be examined by other test methods qualitatively such as the V-funnel
test, L-box test and the U-box test in which the measured properties are affect by the
degree of segregation, but an effective test to directly assess segregation resistance
would be very useful.
2.2.4 Filling capacity tests
The filling capacity test is normally used to examine the quality of self-
compactability after the SCC is proved to satisfy the properties mentioned above.
The test examines a combination of properties and predicts the flowing behaviour in
the real structure. Several versions have been used, some of which are models of
parts of real structure[391. Figure 2-7
shows a typical test.It
represents hebottom
part of an I-section beam, and has a higher requirement of self-compactability than in
the full scale structure [40]. The method s comprehensive, with a lot of work needed
for each est, so it is only suitable for use n the laboratory.
8/10/2019 Thsen Mortar Ucl
46/397
Chapter 2 Literature review 46
diameter 18 mm
m
spacind 32 mm
FIgure2-7 Filling capacity test used In Japan Adapted from [40])
2.2.5 Rheology tests
The rheology of mortar and concrete s generally considered o follow the Bingham
model,
, = TO+P
Therefore rheological tests are generally used o measure he values of yield stress and
plastic viscosity, although, as will be discussed n chapter 10, some authors claim that
it would be more suitable to describe SCC with the Herschel-Bulkely model;
r =, ro +kn
Tests on mortarThere are two main types of devices used to test the rheology of mortar, one is a
coaxial cylinder viscometer, such as the HAAKE Rotovisco CV20 [961, he other is a
two-point rheometer, such as the ViscoCorder [140,141]. The latter needs calibration
to obtain yield stress and plastic viscosity in fundamental units.
In theory these two types of devices should give the same numerical results for the
mortar properties. This has been confirmed by Banfill [1431, who found that the yield
8/10/2019 Thsen Mortar Ucl
47/397
Chapter 2 Literature review 47
stress and plastic viscosity of the same mortar tested with a Viscocorder and coaxial
cylinder viscometer had acceptable agreement.
Inthis project, a smaller version of the two-point apparatus or concrete with a
helical
impeller was established to test mortar. Comparison was also made with the
ViscoCorder and a coaxial cylinder viscometer. This is described n chapter 4.
Tests on concrete
Several test devices have been used to assess SCC, including a coaxial cylinder
rheometer Japan) [110,111], the BTRHEOM France) [42], the BML viscometer
Sweden) 35], and the two-point test UK, Japan) 29,41], etc. The BML viscometer
works on the same principle as a coaxial cylinder viscometer, while the BTRHEOM
is a parallel plate rheometer. Most of them are mainly used n the laboratory because
of the inconvenience of their use on site.
If the values of yield stress and plastic viscosity are obtained in fundamental units,
then the test results obtained with the different apparatuses should be consistent.However, this is not the case. For example, for a successful SCC, Kawai et al [41],
using a two-point test, proposed a yield stress about 50 Pa and the plastic viscosity20-80 Pa. s, and Wallevil and Nielsson, using BML viscometer, proposed 50-70 Pa
and 20-30 Pa. s respectively [21, while Sedran et al [42], using BTRHEOM, suggested
the yield stress ess than 500 Pa and the plastic viscosity 100-200 Pa. s. Clearly, more
study is needed on this subject. The results of the corporationstudy carried out
in
LCPC, Nante, n October 2000, will be a great help in this respect [43].
In this project, a two-point apparatus with helical impeller developed at UCL was
used o test concrete. Discussion of this is left until chapter 4.
2.2.6 Tests on the job site
All the SCC should be checked before it is placed since the compaction is entirelydependent on its self-compactibility. Strict quality control is therefore necessary,including such properties as slump flow, air content, concrete temperature,
8/10/2019 Thsen Mortar Ucl
48/397
Chapter 2 Literature review 48
scorcoation, water content and chloride content. The test methods that have been
used to control fresh properties include slump flow, V-funnel and 0-funnel tests, and
visual observation etc. Clearly, these tests cannot be used to check all the concrete
casting into structure, and an acceptance test for this has been developed by Ouchi et
ed 44] (figure 2-8) which has been used n several applications.
The apparatus is installed bemccii agitator truck and pump at the Job site. All theZ I
concrete is passed through the apparatus, and if it flows through it is considered as
satisfactory. If the concrete flow blocks, it has insufficient self-compactability and
the concrete is rejected.
This lipparatus Was successfully used in the construction site of theLNG tank of
Osaka Gas in 1996-1998 and saved labour compared to the use of other acceptance
tcsts [441.
testing apparatus
t sufficie nt se If-compa cta bi lity
t, ckd flow through apparatus
poor self-cornpactabiI4
stopped by obstaclepump car
obstacle
300 300
1200
Figure2-8 Teston
jobsite
(adapted from [44])
2.2.7 Comments
Each test method has its own distinguishing features. Even when several tests
measure the same property they may show different results because of different
sensitivities. Table 2-2 shows the results of a comparison of several test methodsdescribed earlier by testing 8 SCC mixes, which is extracted from the report by Japan
Society of Civil Engineering (JSCE), 1994 [451. It can be seen that the mix D had
much higher slump flow than mix E although they showed similar results in V-funnel
8/10/2019 Thsen Mortar Ucl
49/397
Chapter 2 Literature review 49
flow time. As a result, the mix D was ranked 1 and 3 in the Ibox passing ability test
and the U-box passing test respectively. This suggests hat the L-box test is more
sensitive o slump flow than to flowing speed compared with the U-box test, therefore
higher flowing concrete shows better property in the L-box test than relatively low
slump flow concrete. Among 8 mixes only 2 mixes (D, E) were marked different
ranks by U-box passing ability test compared to the filling capacity test, suggesting
that U-box test (with R1 bars) and the filling capacity test gives similar indication to
the quality of concrete, but the ranks given by L-passing ability test were generally
higher than those marked by filling capacity test.
As mentioned earlier, the fresh properties of an SCC must be evaluated by a
combination of several test methods, such as the flowability, passing ability,
segregation and filling ability tests. Many different combinations of test methods
have been used in different countries. For example, in Japan (and UCL), a
combination of the slump flow test, the V-funnel test and the U-box test is used (the
two-point test is also used for research) [31,29]; in Sweden, the slump, L-box and
BML viscometer tests are used [35]; in France the slump flow test and theBTRHEOM rheometer are used [53,54]. Therefore it can be argued that evaluation
of an SCC by different combinations of test methods could give different indications
of the quality. Certainly, proven standardised est methods for specification and
quality control are very necessary.
Table 2-2 A comparison of test methods reported In Japan (translated rom [45])
Concrete quality*
concrete mixes A B C D E F G H speed
Standard illingcapacity est (Figure 2-7) 2 3 2 2 3 1 4 3
U-box passing capacity est (R1 bars) (Figure 2-4) 2 3 2 3 2 1 4 3
L-box passing ability test (Figure 2-5, the gap 2 2 1 1 2 1 3 1
between bars 35 mm)V-funnell low test M. W. 5 A 2 1 3 3 3 2 3 1 High
V-funnell low test (Vs.. , .5 m) 1 3 2 2 2 1 3 1 High
0-funnel test 3 2 4 4 3 3 4 1 High
slump flow test (cm) 64 69 65 70 64 65 64 68
*The quality of SCC Is marked with different ranks according o the test results. The best quality Is marked as 1.
followed by 2,3 and 4.
* (w: )t; .
8/10/2019 Thsen Mortar Ucl
50/397
Chapter 2 Literature review 50
2.3 Mix design methods
There is no unique solution to a SCC mix for a particular application since the
material availability and quality requirements or the SCC vary from region to region.
For example, GGBS finer than 10,000 cm/g can be produced n Japan [8], and types
with a specific surface area of about 6000 cm2/g s normally used n SCC because his
gives good flowability, but this is not available in Europe. Also, concrete n Japan s
required to have an air content greater than 4 for durability requirement,
consequently an AE water reducing agent s normally used n Japan, although this is
not required n other countries.
A number of mix design methods have been developed, based on different
approaches, he detailed methods are described n Appendix 1. Table 2-3 provides a
summary of the different mix design methods. It can be seen hat each method has
been developed for its own specific conditions and environment, and has its own
distinguishing features and some nherent limitations. This also makes t difficult to
compare one method to another. Therefore, understanding the specific conditions
seems o be very important when applying these methods. A trial mix for a particular
application during mix design is always very necessary along with an understanding
of the effect of each component on the properties.
There have also been other mix design methods developed or particular applications,
such as Hwang's mix design for columns of a 347m high rise building in Taiwan[57], Hon's mix design used for several applications in China [39] and Walraven
experiences with Netherlands materials [58]. Special SCC mix design, such as steel
fiber reinforced concrete and SCC with expansive additives have also been studied
[59-61].
The number of mix design methods ndicates the difficulty of establishing a methodembracing all range of mixes and easy to follow, this limited the use of SCC to
special concrete with the instruction of SCC specialist. Further study will be needed
to establish a method which can be easily followed and broadly used in various
different environments.
8/10/2019 Thsen Mortar Ucl
51/397
8/10/2019 Thsen Mortar Ucl
52/397
Chapter 2 Literature review 52
2.4 Fresh properties
The fresh properties and their retention in SCC are very important since the
compaction s thoroughly dependent on the self-compactibility of the concrete. In this
section he effect of each constituent of the mix on those properties and their retention
is reviewed, as mortar and concrete. The relationship of properties between mortar
and concrete s also reviewed because of the important role of mortar properties in
SCC.
2.4.1 Effect of constituents on fresh properties
2.4.1.1 Powder
The powder type and content s very effective in controlling the plastic viscosity and
inhibit the segregation of concrete. Almost all types of binders and cements used n
normal concrete have been used in SCC for various reasons. The effects of the
chemical composition and physical properties of each component of the powder are
first reviewed.
Chemical composition
Cement
Cement particles n SCC are highly dispersed by the superplasticizer, which gives rise
to high flowability. The composition of cement affects the efficiency of the
superplasticizer and therefore the mix properties. It has been reported that the
adsorption of superplasticizer by each chemical component is very different. Table
2-4 shows a comparison of the amount of adsorbed naphthalene and polycarbonate
acid superplasticizer by various powders including cements, binders and chemical
components of cement, the dosage of superplasticizer was 1 of powder by weight
[62,631. The powders are grouped into three types according to the size: fine,
medium and coarse, with particle size less than 20 jim, 100 itm. and 200 jim.
8/10/2019 Thsen Mortar Ucl
53/397
Chapter 2 Literature review 53
respectively.
It can be seen that C3A and C4AF adsorb more superplasticizer han C2S and C3S.
This means that higher C3A and C4AF content cement may require more
superplasticizer in order to achieve the same flowability. For this reason the
recommended cement chemical composition for SCC is C3A + C4AF < 10 v C2S `
40-50 , C3S = 50-40 [62]. This also falls in the range of the composition for
moderate heat, ow heat and sulfate resisting cement.
Table 2-4 Comparison of the superplasticizer adsorbed by various type of cement,
binder and constituents of cement (translated rom [62])
Size Cement and Binder BET Specific Specific gravity Adsorption mg/g)
Area (m2/g), (g CM3) Naphthalene Polycarbonate cidLimestone powder 4.99 2.76 5.3 7.4Slag powder 3.2 2.91 6.9 6.3
Fine Fly ash (
8/10/2019 Thsen Mortar Ucl
54/397
Chapter 2 Literature review 54
reason s not clear.
Physical characteristics of powders
The physical characteristics of a powder can be specified by particle size distribution,
shape, mean size, and specific surface area. It also can be described by retained
water/powder ratio (Pp) and deformation coefficient (Ep), two constants used n some
SCC mix design methods.
Therehave been many investigations on the effect of the powder physical
characteristics on fresh properties. These can be summarized as follows:
Fujiwara et al [65]
The plastic viscosity of paste ncreases with specific surface area of cement; the yield
stress s closely related to the particle size distribution which can be represented y N-
value calculated using Rosin-Rammlerequation:
R(Dp) = 100x. exp(-bDp N), (2-1)
Where,
R(Dp) cumulative percentage etained on sieve
Dp particle diameter
b, N constants.
Figures 2-9 2-10 show a typical result measured on the mortar with PC/LSP blends
of powder. It can be seen hat plastic viscosity increased with the increase of specific
surface area but it is also affected by N-value, and yield stress s low when N-value is
about 0.7-0.9.
8/10/2019 Thsen Mortar Ucl
55/397
8/10/2019 Thsen Mortar Ucl
56/397
Chapter 2 Literature review 56
the minimum powder can be 370 kg/M3 OPC with 159 kg/m3 water when Blaine
fineness s 3500-5200 cm/g and N-value is 0.8-0.9 [65].
This very interesting finding could reduce the powder volume in SCC significantly;
the understanding of physical significance of N value would be very helpful for
applying this equation but insufficient information was published.
Uchikawa et al [62]
Concrete mixed with powder containing approximately 30-40 of coarse particles,
40-50 of medium particles and 10-20 of fine particles as shown in table 2-4 may
achieve good flowability [62].
Domone et al [5 1]
Each type of powder has its own characteristic etained water/powder ratio (0p) and
deformation coefficient (Ep). Table 2-5 shows an example of these characteristics of
some powders [5 1]. It can be seen hat PC and GGBS have the highest retained water
powder ratio and this is followed by LSP100 and PFA, and the properties are alsoaffected by superplasticizer.
Table 2-5 Retained water/powder ratio and deformation coefficient (adapted rom [55])
Powder/mixture Op Ep
OPC 1.08 0.061
PFA 0.59 0.024
GGBS 1.10 0.046
LSP100 0.77 0.037
OPC + 1.0 sp 0.86 0.034
The flow spread (F. ) and plastic viscosity (g) of a paste can be predicted by the
retained water/powder ratio (Pp), deformation coefficient of the powder (Ep) and
water/powder ratio (VwNp) by the equations 2-2) and (2-3) [55]:
P=a(VII/ VP
Yk (2-2)EP
16Pr. = (V,, Np - Op )/ Ep (2-3)
Where a, k are constants btained rom experiments.
8/10/2019 Thsen Mortar Ucl
57/397
Chapter 2 Literature review 57
These equations have been used in UCL mix design method to predict initial mix
proportions.
2.4.1.2 Water
Water in paste can be divided into two parts: one is that filling the voids between
particles and physically and chemically retained by the powder (denoted by Op), and
remainder s the free water. Equations (2-2) and (2-3) show that the flowing capacity
(as expressed by r. ) of a paste s controlled by free water, and plastic viscosity of a
paste s related to the ratio of retained water to total water.
Edamatsu et al [66] carried out two series of concrete tests with 100 high belite
cement. Series I included several types of mixes with various sand content and
constant coarse aggregate content, i.e. 50 of dry rodded bulk density; and series 2
were with various coarse aggregate content and constant sand/mortar ratio 0.49 by
volume. In each ype of mix the water/powder ratio varied at 0.7-1.3, and the dosage
of superplasticizer n each concrete was adjusted o obtain the maximum filling height
in U-box test. They found that there was a range of water/powder ratio for each type
of SCC to obtain a filling height more than 300 mrn (figure 2-11). This range varied
with the sand content and coarse aggregate ontent. For example, for a mix type with
sand/mortar ratio 0.45 and a coarse aggregate content 50 of its dry rodded bulk
density, the optimum water/powder ratio ranged rom 0.83 to 0.94 by volume, which
equals o 0.26-0.29 water/cement atio by weight. This is in the low part of the range
of water/powder ratio proposed by JSCE for SCC mixes without viscosity agent, . e.
0.28-0.37 water/powder ratio by weight [61, and the range proposed by Chai, i. e. 0.28-
0.4 by weight [29]. This suggests hat although a water/powder ratio lower than 0.4
by weight is normally required for SCC without a viscosity agent, ndividual limits of
water/powder depends on the type of mix. There is little information on mixes with
viscosity agent, and further study s needed.
8/10/2019 Thsen Mortar Ucl
58/397
8/10/2019 Thsen Mortar Ucl
59/397
Chapter 2 Literature review 59
.. l 7.r.9
.
Ai,--*. 'r
Figure 2-12 The effect of superplasticizer and water on deflocculation of cementparticles
Table 2-6 shows he viscosities of pastes with and without superplasticizer calculated
from data table 2-5 using equations 2-2 & 2-3. The coefficients (a = 0.024 and K= -
6.2x 10-3) were obtained from reference 29]. It can be seen hat the addition of 1.0%
of Naphthalene superplasticizer o a paste with 0.45 water/cement atio resulted n the
spread ncreasing to 418 mm, and the plastic viscosity reduced by 2.4 times. When
water was added o achieve the same spread ncrease, he plastic viscosity decreases
by 12 times. The superplasticizer herefore allows a large increase n flowability with
a relatively small decrease n plastic viscosity compared to that obtained by adding
water.
Table 2-6 The comparison of calculated plastic viscosity of pastes using data Intable 2-5
W/o VwNp Sp % (by wt. of powder) spread (mm) plastic viscosity(mPa. )
0.45 1.42 0.0 256 68.20
0.66 2.09 0.0 418 5.75
0.45 1.42 1.0 418 28.50
As was mentioned earlier many different types of superplasticizer have been used n
SCC, some which have been specially produced or SCC. The dispersion mechanism
is dependent upon the chemical structure of the components, and consequently he
dispersion efficiency is very different in each case.
8/10/2019 Thsen Mortar Ucl
60/397
Chapter 2 Literature review 60
Traditional superplasticizers such as sulfonated naphthalene polymers are anionic
surface-active agents. They are adsorbed on cement particles to provide negative
potential. It is reported that the efficiency is significantly affected by the soluble
alkali content which has an optimum content or a given cement [67].
Polycarboxlic acid-based admixtures such as Glenium5l) are nonionic surface active
agents with zero potential. The side chains of polyethyl